Cited by 75Sustainable Supply Chain ManagementSustainable Design and DevelopmentRecycling and Waste Management Techniques

Product repair in a circular economy: Exploring public repair behavior from a systems perspective

Open access
Parajuly, Keshav, Green, James, Richter, Jessika, Johnson, Michael, Rückschloss, Jana, Peeters, Jef, Kuehr, Ruediger, Fitzpatrick, Colin·2024·Journal of Industrial Ecology

Abstract

Abstract Repair practices are driven not only by consumers’ internal motivation, but also by external infrastructural, social including cultural, financial, and political factors. We explore these factors with the goal of understanding the public repair of electrical and electronic products (e‐products) from a systems perspective to help devise appropriate change interventions. We document (a) behavioral aspects, (b) techno‐economic factors, and (c) intervention strategies aimed at promoting repair practices. To gauge this, a survey was administered among 922 volunteers across 14 countries with experience in repairing e‐products at public repair events. Findings suggest that while behavioral constructs including personal values, beliefs, and attitudes toward product repair are the main proximal drivers of intention to repair, the ability to repair plays an important role. Further, these individual factors are influenced by the techno‐economic settings such as access to repair services, economic benefits, and the ease of product repair stands out as the key enablers for product lifetime extension. As per intervention strategies, the results highlight economic incentives, regulatory requirements, and public awareness as the key drivers. However, influencing repair behavior directly may not always be the most effective strategy. New initiatives to improve involvement should focus on more repairable products, exploiting the innovative potentials of commercial as well as non‐profit repair initiatives, education, and supporting the development of skills among volunteer repairers.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/jiec.13451

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • 39% of Europeans cite high repair costs and logistical difficulties as deterrents to repair.

    “with 39% citing high repair costs and logistical difficulties as deterrents [11].”

    From Designing for Repair and Extended Lifespan: Consumer Expectations and Economic Constraints (2026) · cites this paper as [11]

    The Introduction (page unavailable) identifies economic factors, accessibility, time, and effort as barriers to repair among consumers surveyed in selected EU member states. It does not report that 39% cited these barriers, nor establish that figure for Europeans generally. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Concerns about repair quality persist, often stemming from a lack of accessible, standardized repair services and uncertainty about replacement part reliability.

    “Nevertheless, concerns about repair quality persist, often stemming from a lack of accessible, standardized repair services and uncertainty about replacement part reliability [11].”

    From Designing for Repair and Extended Lifespan: Consumer Expectations and Economic Constraints (2026) · cites this paper as [11]

    The Introduction (page unavailable) describes barriers to accessing repair services and the unavailability of spare parts. The Concluding Discussion (page unavailable) likewise discusses access to spare parts. Neither passage links those barriers to concerns about repair quality or addresses standardized services or the reliability of replacement parts. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Consumer repair behavior remains limited despite increasing policy and industry focus on repairability.

    “Despite increasing policy and industry focus on repairability, consumer repair behavior remains limited.”

    From Designing for Repair and Extended Lifespan: Consumer Expectations and Economic Constraints (2026) · cites this paper as [11]

    The Introduction says consumers’ actual participation in repair remains low despite stated willingness, and it describes growing right-to-repair policy activity. It does not establish that industry focus on repairability is increasing, so that part of the sentence is unsupported by our copy. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Over 80% of Europeans recognize the environmental benefits of sustainable choices.

    “EU surveys show that while over 80% of Europeans recognize the environmental benefits of sustainable choices, far fewer act on them.”

    From Designing for Repair and Extended Lifespan: Consumer Expectations and Economic Constraints (2026) · cites this paper as [11]

    The Introduction reports an EU survey in selected member states showing that willingness to repair exceeded actual repair behavior. Its 62%–83% figure measures willingness to repair, not recognition of environmental benefits; it does not establish that over 80% of Europeans recognize those benefits. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Consumer willingness to engage in repair is closely tied to perceived self-efficacy.

    “One reason is psychological: consumer willingness to engage in repair is closely tied to perceived self-efficacy.”

    From Designing for Repair and Extended Lifespan: Consumer Expectations and Economic Constraints (2026) · cites this paper as [11]

    Section 3.4.2 defines perceived behavioral control as how able participants felt to repair and reports that it predicted intention to repair at home. But section 3.4.1 finds attitude was a much stronger predictor at home, while attitude and subjective norms—not perceived ability—predicted intention to join public repair events. The claim is therefore too broad for the settings studied. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 29

  1. Ackermann, L., Mugge, R., & Schoormans, J. (2018). Consumers' perspective on product care: An exploratory study of motivators, ability factors, and triggers. Journal of Cleaner Production, 183, 380-391.
  2. Bradley, K., & Persson, O. (2022). Community repair in the circular economy -fixing more than stuff. Local Environment, 27(10-11), 1321-1337. https://doi. org/10.1080/13549839.2022.2041580 · DOI
  3. Bridgens, B., Powell, M., Farmer, G., Walsh, C., Reed, E., Royapoor, M., Gosling, P., Hall, J., & Heidrich, O. (2018). Creative upcycling: Reconnecting people, materials and place through making. Journal of Cleaner Production, 189, 145-154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.03.317 · DOI
  4. Cerulli-Harms, A., Suter, J., Landzaat, W., Duke, C., Diaz, A. R., Porsch, L., Peroz, T., Kettner, S., Thorun, C., Svatikova, K., Vermeulen, J., Smit, T., Dekeulenaer, F., & Lucica, E. (2018). Behavioural study on consumers' engagement in the circular economy. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2818/956512 · DOI
  5. Cooper, T., & Salvia, G. (2018). Fix it: Barriers to repair and opportunities for change. In R. Crocker, & K. Chiveralls (Eds), Subverting consumerism: Reuse in an accelerated world (pp. 147-165). Routledge.
  6. Crawford, M. B. (2010). Shop class as soulcraft: An inquiry into the value of work (Reprint ed.). Penguin Books.
  7. Echegaray, F., & Hansstein, F. V. (2017). Assessing the intention-behavior gap in electronic waste recycling: The case of Brazil. Journal of Cleaner Production, 142, 180-190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.05.064 · DOI · Paper page
  8. European Commission, Consumers, Health, Agriculture and Food Executive Agency, Duke, C., Thorun, C., Dekeulenaer, F. (2018). Behavioural study on consumers. engagement in the circular economy: final report, {CEU}. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2818/956512 · DOI
  9. Fang, W.-T., Ng, E., Wang, C.-M., & Hsu, M.-L. (2017). Normative beliefs, attitudes, and social norms: People reduce waste as an index of social relationships when spending leisure time. Sustainability, 9(10), 1696. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9101696 Federal Trade Commission. (2021). FTC to ramp up law enforcement against illegal repair restrictions. https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2021/07/ ftc-ramp-law-enforcement-against-illegal-repair-restrictions · DOI
  10. Hankammer, S., Brenk, S., Fabry, H., Nordemann, A., & Piller, F. T. (2019). Towards circular business models: Identifying consumer needs based on the jobs-to- be-done theory. Journal of Cleaner Production, 231, 341-358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.05.165 · DOI
  11. Janmaimool, P., & Denpaiboon, C. (2016). Evaluating determinants of rural Villagers' engagement in conservation and waste management behaviors based on integrated conceptual framework of pro-environmental behavior. Life Sciences, Society and Policy, 12(1), 12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40504-016-0045-3 · DOI
  12. Jiménez-Parra, B., Rubio, S., & Vicente-Molina, M.-A. (2014). Key drivers in the behavior of potential consumers of remanufactured products: A study on laptops in Spain. Journal of Cleaner Production, 85, 488-496. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.05.047 · DOI
  13. Kumar, A. (2019). Exploring young adults' e-waste recycling behaviour using an extended theory of planned behaviour model: A cross-cultural study. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 141, 378-389. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.10.013 · DOI · Paper page
  14. Lechner, G., Wagner, M. J., Tena, A. D., Fleck, C., & Reimann, M. (2021). Exploring a regional repair network with a public funding scheme for customer repairs: The 'GRAZ repariert'-case. Journal of Cleaner Production, 288, 125588. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125588 · DOI
  15. Lefebvre, M., Lofthouse, V., & Wilson, G. (2018). Towards a circular economy: Exploring factors to repair broken electrical and electronics products by users with pro-environmental inclination. In C. Storni, K. Leahy, M. McMahon, P. Lloyd, & E. Bohemia (Eds.), Design as a catalyst for change-DRS International Conference Proceedings, 25-28 June 2018, Limerick, Ireland. https://doi.org/10.21606/drs.2018.556 · DOI
  16. Lind, H. B., Nordfjærn, T., Jørgensen, S. H., & Rundmo, T. (2015). The value-belief-norm theory, personal norms and sustainable travel mode choice in urban areas. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 44, 119-125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2015.06.001 · DOI
  17. López Dávila, M., Milios, L., Richter, J. L., & Dalhammar, C. (2021). Behavioural insights into personal electronics repair in Sweden. 20th European Roundtable on Sustainable Consumption and Production. Proceedingsof the 20th European Roundtable on Sustainable Consumption and Production, 321-343. https://doi.org/10.3217/978-3-85125-842-4-14 · DOI
  18. Makov, T., & Fitzpatrick, C. (2021). Is repairability enough? Big data insights into smartphone obsolescence and consumer interest in repair. Journal of Cleaner Production, 313, 127561. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127561 · DOI
  19. Messmann, L., Boldoczki, S., Thorenz, A., & Tuma, A. (2019). Potentials of preparation for reuse: A case study at collection points in the German state of Bavaria. Journal of Cleaner Production, 211, 1534-1546. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.11.264 · DOI
  20. Onel, N., & Mukherjee, A. (2017). Why do consumers recycle? A holistic perspective encompassing moral considerations, affective responses, and self-interest motives. Psychology & Marketing, 34(10), 956-971. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21035 · DOI
  21. Parajuly, K., & Wenzel, H. (2017). Potential for circular economy in household WEEE management. Journal of Cleaner Production, 151(C), 272-285. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.03.045 · DOI
  22. Richter, J. L., & Dalhammar, C. (2019). Drivers, barriers, and stakeholder roles in repair: A case study of Sweden. Product Lifetimes and the Environment Conference Proceedings, Berlin. https://portal.research.lu.se/en/publications/stakeholders-drivers-and-barriers-for-local-electronics-repair-a- Richter, J. L., Svensson-Hoglund, S., Dalhammar, C., Russell, J. D., & Thidell, Å. (2022). Taking stock for repair and refurbishing: A review of harvesting of spare parts from electrical and electronic products. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 27, 868-881. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.13315 · DOI
  23. Sabbaghi, M., Esmaeilian, B., Cade, W., Wiens, K., & Behdad, S. (2016). Business outcomes of product repairability: A survey-based study of consumer repair experiences. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 109, 114-122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2016.02.014 · DOI · Paper page
  24. Scott, K. A., & Weaver, T. (2014). To repair or not to repair: What is the motivation. Journal of Research for Consumers, (26), 1-31. http://www.jrconsumers.com/ Academic_Articles/issue_26/Issue26-AcademicArticle-Scott1-31.pdf
  25. Stern, P. C., Dietz, T., Abel, T., Guagnano, G. A., & Kalof, L. (1999). A value-belief-norm theory of support for social movements: The case of environmentalism. Human Ecology Review, 6(2), 81-97. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24707060
  26. Svensson-Hoglund, S., Richter, J. L., Maitre-Ekern, E., Russell, J. D., Pihlajarinne, T., & Dalhammar, C. (2021). Barriers, enablers and market governance: A review of the policy landscape for repair of consumer electronics in the EU and the U.S. Journal of Cleaner Production, 288, 125488. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.jclepro.2020.125488 · DOI
  27. Svensson-Hoglund, S., Russell, J. D., & Richter, J. L. (2022). A process approach to product repair from the perspective of the individual. Circular Economy and Sustainability, 1-33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43615-022-00226-1 · DOI · Paper page
  28. Terzio glu, N. (2020). Repair motivation and barriers model: Investigating user perspectives related to product repair towards a circular economy. Journal of Cleaner Production, 289, 125644, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125644 · DOI · Paper page
  29. Wang, B., Ren, C., Dong, X., Zhang, B., & Wang, Z. (2019). Determinants shaping willingness towards on-line recycling behaviour: An empirical study of household e-waste recycling in China. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 143, 218-225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.01.005 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Parajuly, K., Green, J., Richter, J., Johnson, M., Rückschloss, J., Peeters, J., Kuehr, R., & Fitzpatrick, C.
Affiliations
  • University of Limerick (IE)
  • Lund University (SE)
  • Fraunhofer Institute for Reliability and Microintegration (DE)
  • Flanders Make (Belgium) (BE)
Corresponding author
Richter, Jessika
Venue
Journal of Industrial Ecology
Published
2023-10-13
Volume
28
Issue
1
Pages
74-86
ISSN
  • 1088-1980 (ISSN-L)
  • 1530-9290
OpenAlex
W4387616858
Cited by
75
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 34 · 2025: 30 · 2024: 11
FWCI
16.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Industrial Ecology (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Lirias (KU Leuven) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • Lund University Publications (Lund University) (submittedVersion)
  • Fraunhofer-Publica (Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft) (submittedVersion)
  • University of Limerick Institutional Repository (University of Limerick) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • University of Limerick Institutional Repository (University of Limerick)
Funders
  • Irish Research Council (713279)
  • Svenska Forskningsrådet Formas (2019‐02237, 2022‐02045)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Sustainable Supply Chain Management
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Building and Construction › Sustainable Design and Development
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Waste Management and Disposal › Recycling and Waste Management Techniques
Keywords
product repair, circular economy, electrical and electronic equipment, repairability, economic incentives, public awareness, product life extension, systems approach

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review